[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: TINI PROS PLHSMONHN THS SARKOS

>Theresa J List, Dcs (fcvandvi@juno.com) wrote
>Re: TINI PROS PLHSMONHN THS SARKOS
>
>Greetings! I'm in the process of moving, so I have no access to any
>Greek reference save the tiny glossary in the back of my Nestle-Aland.
>So forgive me if I'm asking something that a browse through BDF might
>explain.
>Reading the last verse of Colossians 2, we get the phrase " OUK EN TIMH

>TINI PROS PLHSMONHN THS SARKOS. " The glossary suggests two different
>translations, either
>
>"which is of no value against indulgence of the flesh" or "which is of
>no value EXCEPT against indulgence of the flesh."
>
>How did "EXCEPT" get in there? Which is a better translation?

We studied Colossians in 2nd-year Greek, using Murray Harris's
(Exegetical?) commentary - by Eerdman's - on Colossians and Philemon. I
vaguely remember that his discussion of this verse explained that there
were great difficulties involved in interpreting and translating it -
deciding which clause this phrase modified, etc., determining whether it
meant that these things were only of value in subduing the flesh or that
they were of NO value in subduing the flesh - it's probably more of an
exegetical problem than a lexical problem. Perhaps read a few good
exegetical commentaries on this passage to get an idea of the problems.

Eric S. Weiss
eweiss@gte.net
http://home1.gte.net/eweiss/index.htm
"Send those testimonies!"